Archived decisions

1. Are there any additional challenges that we should add to the matrix? Or any challenges we should delete?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other topics on which you would wish to see further guidance:

The following additional challenge is proposed:

Under the Support Economic Growth goal, for Cities and regional networks, add additional challenge:

Improve the connectivity and accessibility to local and regional education, health, retail and leisure facilities.

Reason - In order for successful economic growth, it is essential that adequate transport provision is made for the full range of journey types at the local and regional level.

2. Are there ways in which we could make any of the challenges clearer and easier to understand or measure?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other comments you wish to make:

The following modifications are proposed to challenges:

Under the Support Economic Growth goal, for Cities and regional networks, amend challenge (4) as follows:

Support the delivery of housing, and in particular the PSA target of increasing supply to 240,000 net additional dwellings per annum by 2016, through the timely provision of appropriate local and regional transport solutions that facilitate the conditions for the housing to be delivered, while limiting increased congestion

Reason - Proposed change aims to give specific reference to the need for timely and appropriate transport solutions in support of proposed new housing developments.

Under the Promote Equality of Opportunity goal, amend challenge under the City and regional, National and International networks as follows:

Contribute to the reduction in the gap between economic growth rates for different regions and sub-regions.

Reason - Proposed change recognises that there are also disparities in economic growth within regions, at the sub-regional level, that should be addressed. South Hampshire is an example of this.

Under the Contribute to better safety, security and health goal, amend challenge in all sections as follows:

Reduce the social and economic costs of transport to public health, including improvements to air quality consistent with the requirements of the National Air Quality Strategy.

Reason - Proposed change aims to provide better definition on how air quality can be measured.

3. Which of the challenges do you consider as most important?

Please see below.

Please explain you reasons and add any comments you wish to make:

For the South Hampshire sub-region, economic growth is a key driver and the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) have set a targets to increase economic performance and productivity, including the creation of 59,000 new jobs and the provision of 2 million square meters of new employment land and 80,000 new homes between 2006 and 2026.

On this basis, all the challenges highlighted under the Support Economic Growth goal (as proposed for amendment in question 2) are important, together with the associated challenges under the Promote Equality of Opportunity goal that seek to contribute to the reduction in the gap between economic growth rates for different regions and sub-regions (as amended in question 2) and enhance social inclusion and regeneration.

The TfSH Vision also recognises the need to ensure that the sub-region's future transport needs are met in a sustainable way and that a good quality of life is supported both now and in the future. Therefore, the following challenges (summarised) are also considered important:

_ Under Tackle Climate Change goal, challenge to deliver reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (all networks);

_ Under Contribute to better safety, security and health, challenge to reduce social and economic costs of transport to public health (all networks);

_ Under Improve quality of life goal, challenges to reduce the number of people and dwellings exposed to high levels of noise (all networks), improve quality of transport integration into streetscapes / urban environment (City and regional networks) and enhance well-being and sense of community creating more opportunities to social contact, better access to leisure facilities / natural environment (City and regional / National networks).

4. Do you agree central government should lead on the development of solutions for the national network and international networks and that regional and local government should lead for the city and regional networks?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other comments you wish to make:

It is proposed that the National / International network will be expanded within the South Hampshire sub-region. Whilst this is generally welcomed, there needs to be recognition that these routes also have a vital regional and sub-regional role and TfSH requires clarity on how the decision making process for investment on these corridors will consider the relative importance of national / international and regional / sub-regional issues.

Options and solutions for the national / international networks could also address regional and sub-regional issues and this should be recognised both when the options are developed and decisions made about which should be taken forward to implementation.

Within South Hampshire, the development of options and decision making process on which solutions will be implemented on the national / international corridor should fully respect the Multi-Area Agreement (MAA) and Memorandum of Understanding for Highways (MoU), which promotes close constructive working between all parties.

Linkages between the three networks are vital, and it is felt that this is recognised in the document. The mechanisms through which this dialogue occurs will be important.

5. Are there any strategic corridors that should be added to the national network? Or any corridors that should be removed from it?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other comments you wish to make:

The inclusion of the Southampton to London corridor and the South Coast ports to the Midlands is very much welcomed.

In addition to the above two corridors, Consideration should be given to adding London to Portsmouth direct as a strategic corridor. Portsmouth has been identified as a Strategic Destination based on being one of the ten largest urban areas in England. It should therefore should have a direct link to London, consistent with all the other large urban areas shown.

Proper consideration of the Southampton urban area would identify a population similar to Portsmouth and justify recognition as a strategic destination as both a large urban area and a busy port.

Access to and from the Isle of Wight is via South Hampshire and these transport connections to the mainland are vital to its economy. This should be reflected in the strategic corridors.

6. Do you have any suggestions on how best to ensure that solutions for the national network and international networks and for the city and regional networks are developed in a joined-up way?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other comments you wish to make:

It is essential that there is close and ongoing partnership working between central government (responsible for leading on national / international schemes), the regions / local authorities (responsible for city / regional networks) and all relevant delivery agencies (e.g. Highways Agency / Network Rail). Such an approach is implied in paragraph 4.24. As noted in the response to question 4, TfSH requires clarity on how the decision making process for investment on these corridors will consider the relative importance of national / international and regional / sub-regional issues and different modes.

The South Hampshire Multi Area Agreement and associated Memorandum of Understanding provide a framework for how this can take place.

7. Do you have any other comments on the approach, set out in this section, to taking forward the proposals contained in Towards a Sustainable Transport System?

YES

Please explain your reasons and add any other comments you wish to make:

The alignment of decision making timetables set out in the "Timetable for Decision Making" is welcome. This will facilitate multi-modal option generation on a comparable footing.

Given the timetables for option generation, the timely provision of guidance will be appreciated.

8. Would you like to see any significant changes (additions or deletions) to these Strategic National Corridors?

YES

Please give the supporting evidence for any suggested changes.

Consideration should be given to adding London to Portsmouth direct as a strategic corridor. Portsmouth has been identified as a Strategic Destination based on being one of the ten largest urban areas in England. It should therefore should have a direct link to London, consistent with all the other large urban areas shown.

Proper consideration of the Southampton urban area would identify a population similar to Portsmouth and justify recognition as a strategic destination as both a large urban area and a busy port.

Access to and from the Isle of Wight is via South Hampshire and these transport connections to the mainland are vital to the Island's economy. This should be reflected in the strategic national corridors.

9. Are there changes (additions or deletions) you would like to see to the strategic road infrastructure list?

YES

Please give the supporting evidence for any suggested changes.

The retention of the M3 from London to Southampton as strategic road infrastructure is supported by Transport for South Hampshire (TfSH).

TfSH welcomes the addition of the A34, M27 (except J1-3) and M271 to the strategic road infrastructure.

TfSH also supports in principle the addition of local roads within both Portsmouth and Southampton (M275 and A35 / A33 respectively) to the strategic road infrastructure. The A35 / A33 in Southampton should become part of the trunk road network managed by the Highways Agency, to reflect the designation as strategic road infrastructure. The respective local highway authorities will respond separately to this consultation on the management implications for these roads.

The A3 from London to Portsmouth should be added to the strategic road infrastructure list. By 2014, improvement works at Hindhead will be completed, providing a dual carriageway standard route throughout. This will provide consistency with the other large urban areas identified in DaSTS, which all have direct strategic road connectivity with London.

10. Are there changes (additions or deletions) you would like to see to the passenger rail service list?

YES

Please give the supporting evidence for any suggested changes.

London to Portsmouth should be added to the passenger rail list. This would be consistent with the identified other large urban areas, which all have an identified direct rail service to London and in some cases, other destinations.

London to Southampton should be added to the passenger rail list, based on the justification given for including Southampton as a large urban area in the answers to questions 5 and 8.

11. Are there changes (additions or deletions) you would like to see to the rail freight service list?

YES

Please give the supporting evidence for any suggested changes.

Addition of automotive traffic to / from Port of Southampton and the West Midlands / North West England.

12. Are there changes (additions or deletions) you would like to see to the air service list?

NO

Please give the supporting evidence for any suggested changes.